ML20005G486
| ML20005G486 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Prairie Island  |
| Issue date: | 12/11/1989 |
| From: | Larson C NORTHERN STATES POWER CO. |
| To: | Axelson W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9001190224 | |
| Download: ML20005G486 (2) | |
Text
'>
?S$l
- D$W
?'*
l%Dg; jct M er& m17 =
,qaq,
'w s "6 Northem Slabes Power Company i,
3
- ,3
? 414 Nicollet Mall Minneapolis, Minnesota 654011927 E
Telephone (612) 330-5500 7
Dscember 11,c1989 4U L
Mr W L'Axelson,. Chief
. Projects' Branch-2, Region III U:S Nuclear. Regulatory Commission c799 Roosevelt Road
~ Glen Ellyn,> Illinois-60137 4
< PRAIRIE ISLAND NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT
< ~
- Docket Nos', 50 282 License Nos. DPR '
50-306 DPR-60 Supplemental Response to Notice of Violation On Substation Work Control Insoection Recorts No. 50-282/86007 and 50-306/86007 The' purpose of-this letter is to update our response to Insp.ection Reports No.
m 1282/86007;and 306/86007 which was provided by our letter dated August 19,
~
'1986, e
Violation-No. 3-in the subject inspection report concerned procedural deficiencies'in maintenance activities:in the Prairic Island Substation.
As'part of-our. response to this. violation, we committed to perform a task analysis ~ofJthe' relay panels in the substation to identify potential rearrangement.of equipment and re labeling to help avert future human errors.
Subsequent to:the event which resulted in the notice of violation, a Task Force was formed'to evaluate improvements in operating and maintenance-activities in=the NSP nuclear plant substations. The following actions were taken'as.a result of the task force evaluation:
11.A work control process for substation maintenance was implemented.
'2. Procedures were developed to address regular routine maintenance
. activities in the substation.
- 3. Substation drawings and ' labeling were field checked for accuracy.
4 A substation coordinator function was established in the Production Plant Maintenance Department with site coordinators at each plant.
9001190224 891211 g },3 g PDR ADOCK 05000282 Q
PDC 4
10
'*[.
Z eE sf
- u
.g=-
y7 x
,p t.
N'$
l4,.',
,6
'3 LW L Axsittn!..
December-11, 1989-
?l. 'i'(Page 2
!!g
'These actions'have. increased the quality of the work performed in the substation and reduced.the probability of error during substation maintenance.
.During the Task. Force evaluation,.the desirability of a task-analysis'of the
- substation equipment house was reviewed.. While.a task analysis was found to
'.be desirable, it was concluded,that with the' measures described above in i
place, the benefits'that could be: gained from a task. analysis were not great enough-to justify the performance of a task analysis. We would like to modify our response to Violation No. 3 of the subject inspection reports-to reflect-l,
,that no-task analysis will be performed.
j Please contact us if you have any questions relatedLto our response to the subject ~ inspection reports.-
E aa
C E La on
'Vice Pres dent Nuclear Generation
_c:. Regional Administrator III, NRC Senior Resident Inspector, NRC NRR Project Manager, NRC C Charnoff
\\